THE CASE OF THE BARBERS of LONDON.

THE Barbers of London were a Fraternity before the Time of Edward the Second, and by Letters-Patent of Edward the Fourth were made a Body Corporate, and inveſted with ſeveral Powers and Pri⯑vileges. In the 32d Year of Henry the Eighth, the publick Policy thought proper to unite them with another Company (not then incorporated) called the Surgeons of London, in order, (as is moſt probable) to transfer thoſe Powers and Privileges to the latter, without directly appearing to wreſt them from the former to whom they had been originally granted.

This Coalition of the two Companies having now ſubſiſted above Two Hundred Years, the Barbers are ſurpris'd to find an Attempt made by the Surgeons to diſſolve it, by Authority of Parliament, without their Participation or Conſent.

The principal Reaſons aſſigned by the Surgeons, in their printed Caſe, to induce the Legiſlature to this extraordinary Act of Power, are,

That the Barbers, in the Time of Henry the Eighth, were all Sur⯑geons, and that the Parliament, by uniting them with others of ſupe⯑rior Abilities, intended their Improvement in that Profeſſion; but that they having, long ſince, ceaſed to intermeddle with any Branch of Surgery, this Intent of the Act is fruſtrated, and the laudable Purpoſe of the Union at an end.

That by this Alteration of the Circumſtances of things, the Junction of the two Companies (how advantageous ſoever in former Times) is now become highly inconvenient.

That the Surgeons, if diſtinctly incorporated, would be encouraged to meet and communicate to one another their Experiments and Succeſſes.

That the like Separation has taken place at Paris, Edinburgh, and Glaſcow.

BUT the firſt of theſe Reaſons is grounded on a Miſtake in point of Fact; for tho' it be true that the Barbers were all originally Surgeons, and incorporated as ſuch, yet long before the Union in queſtion, moſt of them had quitted the actual Exerciſe of that Profeſſion, and the Right itſelf of exerciſing it in virtue of their Charter, had been ^* taken away [2]by Parliament: And tho' in the Preamble of the uniting Act, both Companies are ſtiled Surgeons, yet from the ^‡ Enacting Part (which ex⯑preſly reſtrains the Barbers from occupying any part of Surgery, except Tooth-drawing) it is evident the Legiſlature did not conſider them as real Surgeons, nor could intend their Improvement in a Science they were forbid to practiſe, ſo that the Circumſtances of Things are not altered from what they then were, or from what they manifeſtly were deſigned to be; and therefore the Barbers having no Relation to the Surgeons, or their Art (as it was then deemed no Objection to their Union) [...]annot now, with any Propriety, be inſiſted on as a Reaſon for their Separation.

With regard to the Inconveniencies complained of, as the Charge is general, this general Anſwer only can be given, That the Barbers have always, with the greateſt Deference, ſubmitted to the Surgeons in all Matters peculiar to them, and chearfully contributed, out of their com⯑mon Stock, towards every Expence which they have declared neceſſary for the Honour or Advancement of their Profeſſion. And ſince none of theſe Inconveniencies have been of Conſequence enough to deſerve being particularly pointed out, we may venture to pronounce them in⯑conſiderable, and unworthy the Attention and Redreſs of Parliament; and the rather, as all of them put together, have not prevented the Surgeons of London from carrying the Improvement of their Art, both in Speculation and Practice, to a greater Height than has been done in any other Place or Nation.

That the frequent Meetings of ingenious Men, and their free Com⯑munications on the Subject of their Profeſſion, may tend to the Benefit of Mankind in general, and to the Honour of their Country in particular, is not denied: But ſurely the Conſtitution of the united Company is no obſtacle to theſe laudable Purpoſes. The Barbers have for many Years, at their Monthly Courts, ſubmitted to withdraw at a ſtated Hour, and reſigned the Parlour to the Surgeons: And if this Condeſcen⯑ſion is not ſuppoſed to afford them ſufficient Time for Converſation on theſe particular Days, nothing hinders them from holding ſeperate Aſſemblies at the Hall almoſt every other Day in the Year.

As to what is ſaid to have been done at Paris, Edinburgh, and Glaſcow, no particular anſwer can be given, unleſs it appeared by what Means, for what Reaſons, and upon what Terms the Separations in thoſe Places were brought about. In London there are but two Inſtances of Separations of Companies, viz. that of the Feltmakers from the Haberdaſhers in 1604, and that of the Apothecaries from the Grocers in 1617; but both theſe were effected by mutual Conſent, without the Intervention of Parliament; and it may be proper to obſerve, that the Feltmakers miſcarried in a former Application for an excluſive Charter in 1576 for want of the Haberdaſhers Conſent.

Upon the whole, therefore, the Barbers humbly hope the forgoing Reaſons will be deemed inſufficient to induce the Legiſlature to deſtroy an Union they themſelves thought proper to form, an Union which two hundred Years Exiſtence has rendred venerable, and which, by [3]the Improvements above-mentioned, appears to have anſwered all the Purpoſes for which it was eſtabliſhed.

But if for other Reaſons (which the Surgeons ſay may be given) the Parliament ſhall be inclined to favour them in this part of their Re⯑queſt; the Barbers, from the ſcrupulous Regard and Tenderneſs which that Auguſt Aſſembly has always ſhewn for private Property, cannot but hope they ſhall be continued in the Enjoyment of all their preſent Poſſeſſions, without any Diviſion whatſoever, and that, for the follow⯑ing Reaſons:

Becauſe moſt of the united Company's Lands and Tenements, (particularly the Site of their Hall, Parlour, &c.) originally belonged to them, and by the uniting Act ^* ſeem with great Juſtice to have been intended to remain to their ſole and ſeparate Uſe, tho' in fact the Sur⯑geons have hitherto been indulged in the equal Enjoyment of them with the Barbers.

Becauſe the Surgeons Share of what may have been acquired ſince the Union, will ſcarce be an adequate Recompence to the Barbers for the above Indulgence, much leſs for the unmerited Loſs of a Bro⯑therhood now ſo honourable and advantageous to them.

Becauſe the Expences of the Barbers when diſtinctly incor⯑porated, can fall but very little, if any thing, ſhort of thoſe of the united Company, ſo that a Reduction of Income muſt ſubject them to very great Difficulties, which (conſidering that they neither deſire, nor have given the Surgeons juſt Cauſe to deſire a Separation) would be extremely hard and unreaſonable.

Becauſe the preſent flouriſhing Condition of the Surgeons, (the only real Alteration in the Circumſtances of Things) will ſufficient⯑ly enable them to ſupport the Dignity of their new and favourite In⯑ſtitution with becoming Splendor, without diſtreſſing their leſs happy Brethren the Barbers.